The Managing Director of the Global Tracking and Maritime Solutions, Aminata Bangura, is struggling to save herself and GTMS from an action of damages brought against them at the Sixth Judicial Circuit for allegedly altering and falsifying the 2018 Cargo Tracking Note (CTN) thereby using the altered and falsified contract as a basis to renew the contract in 2024 with the Government of Liberia (GoL).
The lawsuit has exposed Bangura’s alleged unorthodox business practices. Without the consent of the original contracting party GTMS-UK, Bangura unilaterally signed a questionable contract with the GoL.
The future of GTMS in Liberia hangs in the balance as the lawsuit intensifies at the Civil Law Court.
It can be recalled that Bangura has been accused of bad administrative and operational dealings in the CETIS/Zip partnership.
This followed mounting tensions surrounding the Ministry of Labor’s foreign worker permit modernization project, with serious questions emerging about asset management, contractual compliance, and financial accountability.
At the center of the dispute is ZIP Solutions, a subcontracted firm now engaged in a public media campaign as its partnership with the project’s principal contractor unravels.
According to documents reviewed and insider accounts obtained during the investigation, what began in 2021 as a promising initiative to modernize Liberia’s foreign worker permit system has deteriorated into a contentious and highly public fallout.
The dispute involves ZIP Solutions and its Chief Executive Officer, Aminata Bangura, whose company was engaged to perform specific enforcement-related duties under a broader contractual framework.
The principal contractor awarded the Ministry of Labor project in 2021 was CETIS Liberia, a European-backed technology firm tasked with financing, designing, deploying, and managing the digital work permit infrastructure.
CETIS Liberia assumed full responsibility for system development, hardware and software installation, biometric integration, staff training, vehicle procurement and overall technical operations.
ZIP Solutions, which was established in Liberia in the same year the contract was awarded, was brought in strictly as a subcontractor. Contractual records reviewed indicate that ZIP Solutions was neither the lead contractor nor the investor and did not own the project infrastructure; instead, its mandate was limited to enforcement coordination and related operational support.
However, sources familiar with the project report that within the first year disagreements began to surface. These disputes reportedly centered on technical capacity, coordination challenges, implementation standards and compliance procedures.
Insiders disclosed that CETIS Liberia introduced additional internal control measures after identifying operational setbacks and regulatory risks. Those corrective mechanisms, according to multiple sources, contributed to escalating tensions between the two companies.
One of the most serious allegations now under scrutiny involves project vehicles, motorbikes, and technical equipment financed entirely by CETIS Liberia. Sources confirmed that several vehicles assigned strictly for project operations were transported across the Sierra Leone border without prior authorization, documented oversight, or formal reporting.
The assets in question were procured as part of the investor-funded operational framework and were not designated for personal use.
Individuals close to the matter stated that attempts to implement tracking systems and asset verification protocols were met with resistance. Subsequently, some vehicles and equipment were reportedly declared missing, damaged, or otherwise unaccounted for, intensifying demands for transparency and accountability.
Financial documents examined during the investigation indicate that CETIS Liberia funded the complete operational structure of the project. This included full system development, software engineering, hardware infrastructure, biometric technology, staff training programs, vehicles, motorbikes, and technical deployment.
Contractual agreements reviewed show that ZIP Solutions did not finance the system, did not construct the technical platform, and did not retain ownership rights over the project infrastructure.
Despite the defined subcontracting arrangement, sources allege that ZIP Solutions exercised operational influence beyond its contractual scope.
This alleged expansion of control reportedly generated friction over asset management, enforcement oversight, reporting obligations, and compliance standards.
In September 2025, a Ministry of Labour performance assessment reportedly identified significant deficiencies in enforcement coordination and reporting functions, responsibilities that fell within the subcontractor’s assigned mandate. The assessment also raised concerns regarding incomplete financial documentation and gaps in audit reporting.
According to individuals with knowledge of the review, requests for comprehensive audited financial records were not fully satisfied. For a European-regulated investor, such compliance shortcomings carry substantial legal and reputational risks. Sources indicate that trust between the parties deteriorated rapidly once these concerns surfaced, ultimately accelerating discussions about terminating the partnership.
As termination deliberations intensified, ZIP Solutions initiated a public media campaign, portraying itself as a victim of political interference and contractual injustice. However, individuals familiar with the dispute maintain that the disagreement is rooted in contractual documentation, asset accountability, and financial transparency, rather than political persecution.
One source close to the matter emphasized that the issue centers on performance standards and contractual obligations. Another individual involved in the project noted that disputes of this nature are typically resolved through formal legal and arbitration mechanisms, rather than through public advocacy campaigns.
Further background inquiries reveal that this is not the first high-profile business dispute involving Aminata Bangura.
Reports indicate prior partnership conflicts connected to logistics and port-related operations, including activities associated with GTMS at the Freeport of Monrovia. Additionally, Bangura is reportedly engaged in ongoing legal disputes involving business associates and a former Minister of Labour.
Legal experts consulted during the investigation stressed that complex contractual disputes involving foreign investment, cross-border asset movement, and financial compliance are ultimately determined through documentary evidence and judicial review. They underscored that asset tracking, audit trails, and contractual clauses will likely form the foundation of any legal proceedings that follow.
As the matter moves closer to formal adjudication, observers note that the central issues remain contractual performance, asset accountability, and financial transparency. While public statements continue to circulate, the resolution of the Ministry of Labour modernization project dispute is expected to depend on evidence presented before the appropriate legal authorities.
